Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Agricultural Science and Engineering

Front. Agr. Sci. Eng.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF ALMOND, PEACH AND PLUM UNDER REGULATED DEFICIT IRRIGATION
Rachid RAZOUK1(), Abdellah KAJJI1, Anas HAMDANI1,2, Jamal CHARAFI1, Lahcen HSSAINI1, Said BOUDA2
1. National Agricultural Research Institute, Meknes, BP 578, Morocco
2. Laboratory of Biotechnology and Valorization of Plant Genetic Resources, Faculty of Sciences and Techniques, University of Sultan Moulay Slimane, Beni Mellal, BP 523, Morocco
Download: PDF(319 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

• Regulated deficit irrigation was assessed in almond, peach and plum over 3 years.

• Fruit-growth slowdown stages are appropriate periods to apply deficit irrigation.

• Peach yields were unaffected under a regulated deficit irrigation of 75% ETC.

• Regulated deficit irrigation of 50% ETC maintained yields of almond and plum.

• Fruit quality improved under regulated deficit irrigation.

The effects of regulated deficit irrigation (RDI) on the performance of almond cv. Tuono, peach cv. JH-Hall and plum cv. Stanley were assessed on the Saiss Plain (NW, Morocco) over three consecutive growing seasons (2011–2013). Irrigation treatments consisted of a control, irrigation applied to fully satisfy crop water requirements (100% ETC), and two RDI treatments, irrigation applied to 75% ETC (RDI-75) and 50% ETC (RDI-50). These three treatments were applied during fruit-growth slowdown periods corresponding to Stages II and III in almond and Stage II in peach and plum. Yield and fruit quality traits were determined. The effect of RDI differed between species. Yield and fruit size were reduced significantly only in peach under RDI-50. Fruit quality improved in this species in the first year of the experiment, with an increase of sugar/acid ratio and polyphenol content. Plum quality also improved but the effects were significant only in the second and third years. Similar results were recorded in almond kernel, but their epidermal grooves were deeper under RDI-50, and this may have affected their commercial value. It is concluded that water can be saved during the fruit-growth slowdown period by up to 25% in peach and 50% in almond and plum with improvements in fruit quality without affecting total yield.

Keywords fruit quality      fruit yield      Prunus domestica      Prunus dulcis      Prunus persica      regulated deficit irrigation     
Corresponding Author(s): Rachid RAZOUK   
Just Accepted Date: 26 March 2020   Online First Date: 02 December 2020   
 Cite this article:   
Rachid RAZOUK,Abdellah KAJJI,Anas HAMDANI, et al. YIELD AND FRUIT QUALITY OF ALMOND, PEACH AND PLUM UNDER REGULATED DEFICIT IRRIGATION[J]. Front. Agr. Sci. Eng. , 02 December 2020. [Epub ahead of print] doi: 10.15302/J-FASE-2020325.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/10.15302/J-FASE-2020325
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fase/EN/Y/V/I/0
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Rachid RAZOUK
Abdellah KAJJI
Anas HAMDANI
Jamal CHARAFI
Lahcen HSSAINI
Said BOUDA
Soil depth/cm Clay/% Silt/% Sand/% Organic matter/% CaCO3/% P2O5/ppm K2O/ppm pH EC/(mS·cm−1)
0–35 43.0 10.2 46.8 2.51 3.0 73.36 458.87 7.30 0.10
35–70 37.6 16.1 46.3 1.58 3.1 15.12 222.48 8.06 0.07
Tab.1  Physical and chemical proprieties of the soil in the experimental orchard
Fig.1  Monthly rainfall and reference crop evapotranspiration calculated using the Hargreaves model in the experimental orchard over the three years of the study.
Species RDI application perioda Fruit growthb/(mm·d1) Total amount of irrigation per treatment/(m3·ha1)
Treatment 2011 2012 2013
Peach May 16–June 1 0.45 Control 4064 4192 4622
RDI-75 4004 4100 4529
RDI-50 3944 4008 4436
Plum May 25–July 1
July 16–harvest
0.18 Control 3810 3930 4340
RDI-75 3190 3335 3687
RDI-50 2570 2740 3034
Almond April 19–harvest
(September 4)
0.02 Control 3556 3668 4050
RDI-75 2798 2817 3167
RDI-50 2040 1966 2284
Tab.2  RDI period and total applied water over the three years (2011–2013) in the control and the RDI treatments
Species Treatment Yield per tree/kg Yield efficiency of TCSA/(kg·cm2) Fruit weight/g
2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013
Peach Control 28.3 a 19.8 a 24.0 a 0.14 a 0.09 a 0.12 a 118 a 123 a 121 a
RDI-75 26.7 a 18.6 a 22.5 a 0.13 a 0.09 a 0.11 a 106 a 118 a 118 a
RDI-50 16.7 b 13.6 b 16.1 b 0.10 b 0.08 b 0.10 b 90 b 96 b 97 b
ANOVA * * * * * * ** ** **
Plum Control 33.9 21.9 32.0 0.22 0.14 0.21 38 40 37
RDI-75 31.7 20.6 30.0 0.23 0.15 0.22 35 39 36
RDI-50 30.1 19.5 28.5 0.22 0.14 0.20 35 36 36
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Almond Control 10.6 8.0 8.1 0.06 0.04 0.06 2.7 2.8 2.7
RDI-75 10.0 7.6 7.7 0.05 0.04 0.05 2.6 2.7 2.6
RDI-50 9.8 7.4 7.5 0.05 0.03 0.04 2.6 2.5 2.5
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns ns
Tab.3  Yield and fruit weight of peach, almond and plum over the three years (2011–2013) in the control and the RDI treatments
Species Treatment Fruit weight/g Fruit length/mm Fruit width/mm Pit weight/g Weight ratio pit per fruit
Peach Control 120.67 a 5.80 a 6.31 a 6.54 a 0.06
RDI-75 114.00 a 5.68 a 5.87 a 6.07 a 0.06
RDI-50 94.33 b 5.32 b 5.52 b 4.60 b 0.06
ANOVA ** ** ** ** ns
Plum Control 38.33 5.20 3.58 2.09 0.06
RDI-75 36.67 5.10 3.44 2.00 0.06
RDI-50 35.67 5.06 3.46 1.78 0.06
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns
Tab.4  Average values for three years (2011–2013) of weight and dimensions of peach and plum fruits in the control and the RDI treatments
Treatment Nut weight/g Nut length/mm Nut width/mm Kernel weight/g Weight ratio Kernel/Nut Epidermal grooves in kernels
Number per kernel Reliefa
Control 2.73 2.86 1.54 1.12 0.42 10.5 2.2 b
RDI-75 2.63 2.82 1.52 1.04 0.39 11.0 2.2 b
RDI-50 2.53 2.93 1.56 1.01 0.39 11.1 3.0 a
ANOVA ns ns ns ns ns ns **
Tab.5  Average values for the three years (2011–2013) of weight and dimensions of almond fruits in the control and the RDI treatments
Species Treatment Moisture/% SSC/(mg·g1 dw) AAC/(mg·g1 dw) Polyphenol/(mg per 100 g dw) Ratio (SSC/AAC)
Peach Control 82.5 390.7 c 29.2 a 513.4 c 13.38 c
RDI-75 81.2 428.5 c 24.7 b 614.0 b 17.35 b
RDI-50 80.1 444.4 a 20.9 c 905.4 a 21.26 a
ANOVA ns ** * * *
Plum Control 74.9 418.9 c 35.2 a 1477.1 c 11.90 c
RDI-75 74.9 445.8 b 31.2 b 1869.5 b 14.29 b
RDI-50 74.9 459.9 a 30.0 b 3099.0 a 15.33 a
ANOVA ns * * ** *
Almond Control 3.9 2.0 b 143.2 a 6.9 c 0.01 b
RDI-75 3.9 2.2 ab 134.2 b 22.4 b 0.02 a
RDI-50 3.9 2.3 a 134.8 b 54.4 a 0.02 a
ANOVA ns * * ** *
Tab.6  Moisture, soluble sugar (SSC), amino acid (AAC) and polyphenol content in peach and plum pulp and almond kernels in the control and the RDI treatments in 2013
Species Treatment Degrees Brix/°Bx Titratable acidity (meq per 100 g fw) pH
2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013
Peach Control 12.2 b 13.6 b 14.4 c 22.0 a 21.9 a 22.0 a 6.9 b 6.9 b 7.0 b
RDI-75 13.5 a 15.1 a 15.6 b 20.0 b 19.9 b 19.5 b 7.1 a 7.1 a 7.2 a
RDI-50 13.6 a 15.2 a 17.6 a 16.4 c 16.3 c 14.7 c 7.2 a 7.2 a 7.3 a
ANOVA ** ** ** ** ** ** * * *
Plum Control 25.3 19.9 c 22.2 c 5.3 5.2 4.9 a 7.1 7.0 7.1
RDI-75 24.6 21.5 b 24.0 b 4.8 4.7 4.5 a 6.6 6.8 6.7
RDI-50 22.7 24.2 a 26.9 a 4.6 4.5 4.0 b 6.6 6.8 6.6
ANOVA ns ** ** ns ns * ns ns ns
Tab.7  Sugar content (degrees Brix), titratable acidity and pH of peach and plum pulp in the control and the RDI treatments
Treatment Oil content (% dw)
Control 56.7 b
RDI-75 56.9 b
RDI-50 59.0 a
ANOVA *
Tab.8  Oil contents in almond kernels, in the control and the RDI treatments in 2013
1 J Kurtze, M Morais, E Platko, H Thompson. Advancing Water Management Strategies in Morocco. Rabat: Ribat Al Fath Association for Sustainable Development, 2015
2 P Vaysse, P Soing, P Peyremorte. Irrigation of fruit trees. Paris: Interprofessional Technical Center for Fruits and Vegetables, 1990
3 I Goodwin, A M Boland. Water Reports 22. Scheduling deficit irrigation of fruit tree for optimizing water use efficiency. Rome: FAO, 2002, 67–78
4 A Capra, S Consoli, B Scicolone. Deficit irrigation: theory and practice. In: Alonso D, Iglesias H J, eds. Agricultural Irrigation Research Progress. Hauppauge: Nova Science Publishers, 2008, 53–83
5 M Kathleen, W Thomas. Tree fruit Irrigation: a comprehensive manual of deciduous tree fruit irrigation needs. Wenatchee: Good Fruit Growers, 1994
6 R Duncan. The scoop on fruits and nuts in Stanislaus County: drought irrigation strategies for peaches and almonds. Cooperative Extension of University of California, 2014, 19(1): 1–3
7 J Bretaudeau, Y Faure. Atlas of fruit tree growing. Paris: Techniques and Documentation, 1991
8 C Pinto, G Reginato, K Mesa, P Shinya, M Díaz, R Infante. Monitoring the flesh softening and the ripening of peach during the last phase of growth on-tree. HortScience, 2016, 51(8): 995–1000
https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.51.8.995
9 P E Kriedemann, I Goodwin. Regulated deficit irrigation and partial rootzone drying. Canberra: Land and Water Australia, 2003
10 D A Goldhamer, E Fereres, M Salinas. Can almond trees directly dictate their irrigation needs. California Agriculture, 2003, 57(4): 138–144
https://doi.org/10.3733/ca.v057n04p138
11 M C Ruiz-Sánchez A Torrecillas, A Perez-Pastor, R Domingo. Regulated deficit irrigation in apricot trees. Acta Horticulturae, 2000, 537(537): 759–766
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2000.537.90
12 R C Ebel, E L Proebsting, R G Evans. Deficit irrigation to control vegetative growth in apple and monitoring fruit growth to schedule irrigation. HortScience, 1995, 30(6): 1229–1232
https://doi.org/10.21273/HORTSCI.30.6.1229
13 P D Mitchell, B Van Den Ende, P H Jerie, D J Chalmers. Response of Bartlett pear to withholding irrigation, regulated deficit irrigation, and tree spacing. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 1989, 114(1): 15–19
14 D A Goldhamer, R H Beede. Regulated deficit irrigation effects on yield, nut quality and water use efficiency of mature pistachio trees. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 2004, 79(4): 538–545
https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2004.11511802
15 A Moriana, F Orgaz, M Pastor, E Fereres. Yield responses of mature olive orchard to water deficits. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 2003, 123(3): 425–431
https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.128.3.0425
16 J Girona, M Mata, A Arbones, S Alegre, J Rufat, J Marsal. Peach tree response to single and combined regulated deficit irrigation under shallow soils. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science , 2003, 128(3): 432–440
https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.128.3.0432
17 M Gelly, I Recasens, M Mata, A Arbones, J Rufat, J Girona, J Marsal. Effects of water deficit during stage II of peach fruit development and postharvest on fruit quality and ethylene production. Journal of Horticultural Science & Biotechnology, 2003, 78(3): 324–330
https://doi.org/10.1080/14620316.2003.11511626
18 D W Lawlor. Carbon and nitrogen assimilation in relation to yield: mechanisms are the key to understanding production systems. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2002, 53(370): 773–787
https://doi.org/10.1093/jexbot/53.370.773 pmid: 11912221
19 J Fanwoua, E Bairam, M Delaire, G Buck-Sorlin. The role of branch architecture in assimilate production and partitioning: the example of apple (Malus domestica). Frontiers of Plant Science, 2014, 5(338): 338
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00338 pmid: 25071813
20 N Ben Mechlia, M Ghrab, R Zitouna, B Ben Mimoun, M Masmoudi. Cumulative effect over five years of deficit irrigation on peach yield and quality. Acta Horticulturae, 2002, 592(42): 301–307
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2002.592.42
21 A Jaroszewska. Quality of fruit cherry, peach and plum cultivated under different water and fertilization regimes. Journal of Elementology, 2011, 16(1): 51–58
22 S T Shah, M Sajid. Influence of calcium sources and concentrations on the quality and storage performance of peach. Sarhad Journal of Agriculture, 2017, 33(4): 532–539
https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2017/33.4.532.539
23 M Gelly, I Recasens, J Girona, M Mata, A Arbones, J Rufat, J Marsal. Effects of stage II and postharvest deficit irrigation on peach quality during maturation and after cold storage. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2004, 84(6): 561–568
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1686
24 A Naor. Irrigation scheduling of peach deficit irrigation at different phenological stages and water stress assessment. Acta Horticulturae, 2006, 713(713): 339–349
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2006.713.49
25 M Rahmati, G Vercambre, G Davarynejad, M Bannayan, M Azizi, M Génard. Water scarcity conditions affect peach fruit size and polyphenol contents more severely than other fruit quality traits. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2015, 95(5): 1055–1065
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.6797 pmid: 24948582
26 S Maatallah, M Guizani, H Hjlaoui, N Boughattas, F Lopez-Lauri, M Ennajeh. Improvement of fruit quality by moderate water deficit in three plum cultivars (Prunus salicina L.) cultivated in a semi-arid region. Fruits, 2015, 70(6): 325–332
https://doi.org/10.1051/fruits/2015023
27 Y Zhu, C Taylor, K Sommer, K Wilkinson, M Wirthensohn. Effect of deficit irrigation on almond kernel constituents. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Almonds and Pistachios 2014, VIth. Leuven. Acta Horticulturae, 2014, (1028): 221–223
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2014.1028.35
28 J Ripoll, L Urban, M Staudt, F Lopez-Lauri, L P R Bidel, N Bertin. Water shortage and quality of fleshy fruits—making the most of the unavoidable. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2014, 65(15): 4097–4117
https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/eru197 pmid: 24821951
29 Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). Guidelines for soil description. 4th ed. Rome: FAO, 2006
30 G H Hargreaves. Defining and using reference evapotranspiration. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage Engineering, 1994, 120(6): 1132–1139
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9437(1994)120:6(1132)
31 E Fereres, W O Pruitt, J A Beutel, D W Henderson, E Holzapfel, H Shulbach, K Uriu. ET and drip irrigation scheduling. In: Fereres E, ed. Drip irrigation management. University of California, 21259, 1981, 8–13
32 R Razouk, J Ibijbijen, A Kajji, M Karrou. Response of peach, plum and almond to water restrictions applied during slowdown periods of fruit growth. American Journal of Plant Sciences, 2013, 4(3): 561–570
https://doi.org/10.4236/ajps.2013.43073
33 O Kodad, L Lebrigui, L El-Amrani, I Socias, R Company. Physical fruit traits in Moroccan almond seedlings: quality aspects and post-harvest uses. International Journal of Fruit Science, 2015, 15(1): 36–53
https://doi.org/10.1080/15538362.2014.924830
34 S V Babu, M M Shareef, A P Shetty, K T Shetty. HPLC method for amino acids profile in biological fluids and inborn metabolic disorders of aminoacidopathies. Indian Journal of Clinical Biochemistry, 2002, 17(2): 7–26
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02867967 pmid: 23105346
35 F Dubois, X A Gilles, J K Hamilton, P A Rebecs, F Smith. Colorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Analytical Chemistry, 1956, 28(3): 350–356
https://doi.org/10.1021/ac60111a017
36 E Yemm, W Cooking. Determination of amino acids with ninhydrin. Analysis, 1955, 80(948): 209–213
37 V L Singleton, J A Rossi. Colorimetry of total phenolics with phosphomolybdic-phosphotungstic acid reagents. American Journal of Enology and Viticulture, 1965, 16(3): 144–153
38 J Lichou. Apricot: varieties, instructions for use. Paris: Interprofessional Technical Center for Fruits and Vegetables, 1998
39 D Goldhamer, M Salinas, C Crisosto, K Day, M Soler, A Moriana. Effects of regulated deficit irrigation and partial root zone drying on late harvest peach tree performance. Acta Horticulturae, 2002, 592(592): 343–350
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2002.592.48
40 T Sotiropoulos, D Kalfountzos, I Aleksiou, S Kotsopoulos, N Koutinas. Response of a clingstone peach cultivar to regulated deficit irrigation. Scientia Agrícola, 2010, 67(2): 164–169
https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-90162010000200006
41 A M Boland, P H Jerie, P D Mitchell, I Goodwin, D J Connor. Long-term effects of restricted root volume and regulated deficit irrigation on peach: productivity and water use. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 2000, 125(1): 143–148
https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.125.1.143
42 D J Chalmers, P D Mitchell, L Van Heek. Control of peach tree growth and productivity by regulated water supply, tree density and summer pruning. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 1981, 106(3): 307–312
43 P D Mitchell, D J Chalmers. The effect of reduced water supply on peach tree growth and yields. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 1982, 107: 853–856
44 N B Cui, T S Du, F S Li, L Tong, S Z Kang, M X Wang, X Z Liu, Z J Li. Response of vegetative growth and fruit development to regulated deficit irrigation at different growth stages of pear-jujube tree. Agricultural Water Management, 2009, 96(8): 1237–1246
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2009.03.015
45 T S Du, S Z Kang, J H Zhang, F S Li. Water use and yield responses of cotton to alternate partial root-zone drip irrigation in the arid area of north-west China. Irrigation Science, 2008, 26(2): 147–159
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00271-007-0081-0
46 M Valverde, R Madrid, A L Garcia. Effect of the irrigation regime, type of fertilization, and culture year on the physical proprieties of almond (cv. Guara). Journal of Food Engineering, 2006, 76(4): 584–593
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2005.06.009
47 J Girona, M Mata, J Marsal. Regulated deficit irrigation during the kernel-filling period and optimal irrigation rates in almond. Agricultural Water Management, 2005, 75(2): 152–167
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2004.12.008
48 I F Garcia-Tegero, V H Duran-Zuazo, L M Velez, A Hernandez, A Salguero, J L Muruel-Fernandez. Improving almond productivity under deficit irrigation in semiarid zones. Open Agriculture Journal, 2011, 5(1): 56–62
https://doi.org/10.2174/1874331501105010056
49 A Battilani. Regulated deficit of irrigation effects on growth and yield of plum tree. Acta Horticulturae, 2004, 664(4): 55–62
https://doi.org/10.17660/ActaHortic.2004.664.4
50 D S Intrigliolo, J R Castel. Performance of various water stress indicators for prediction of fruit size response to deficit irrigation in plum. Agricultural Water Management, 2006, 83(1–2): 173–180
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2005.12.005
51 D L Bruce, A S Kenneth, M S Stephen, O Bill, T Y James. Sensitivity of yield and fruit quality of french prune to water deprivation at different fruit growth stage. Journal of the American Society for Horticultural Science, 1995, 120(2): 139–140
https://doi.org/10.21273/JASHS.120.2.139
52 C Hilaire, P Giauque, V Mathieu, P Soing, A Osaer, D Scandella, J Lichou, F Maillard, C Hutin. The peach. Paris: Interprofessional Technical Center for Fruits and Vegetables, 2003
53 D Plenet, S Simon, G Vercambre, F Lescourret. Cropping systems in fruit tree growing and fruit quality. Innovations Agronomiques, 2010, 9: 85–105
54 C Grasselly, H Gall. Pomological study of forty varieties of almond tree. Technical Information Bulletin, 1969, 241: 507–521
55 V A Lombardo, S Osorio, J Borsani, M A Lauxmann, C A Bustamante, C O Budde, C S Andreo, M V Lara, A R Fernie, M F Drincovich. Metabolic profiling during peach fruit development and ripening reveals the metabolic networks that underpin each developmental stage. Plant Physiology, 2011, 157(4): 1696–1710
https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.111.186064 pmid: 22021422
56 M Carbonaro, M Mattera. Polyphenoloxidase activity and polyphenol levels in organically and conventionally grown peach (Prunus persica L., cv. Regina bianca) and pear (Pyrus communis L., cv. Williams). Food Chemistry, 2001, 72(4): 419–424
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0308-8146(00)00248-X
57 B H Wu, M Genard, F Lescourret, L Gomez, S H Li. Influence of assimilate and water supply on seasonal variation of acids in peach (cv. Suncrest). Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, 2002, 82(15): 1829–1836
https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.1267
58 M Génard, F Lescourret, L Gomez, R Habib. Changes in fruit sugar concentrations in response to assimilate supply, metabolism and dilution: a modeling approach applied to peach fruit (Prunus persica). Tree Physiology, 2003, 23(6): 373–385
https://doi.org/10.1093/treephys/23.6.373 pmid: 12642239
59 C Becel. Root growth in peach orchard: influence of water distribution in soil and availability of carbon assimilates. Avignon: University of Avignon and the Vaucluse, 2010
60 G López A Arbones, J Del Campo, M Mata, X Vallverdu, J Girona, J Marsal. Response of peach trees to regulated deficit irrigation during stage II of fruit development and summer pruning. Spanish Journal of Agricultural Research, 2008, 6(3): 479–491
https://doi.org/10.5424/sjar/2008063-340
61 M M Chaves, J P Maroco, J S Pereira. Understanding plant response to drought: from genes to the whole plant. Functional Plant Biology, 2003, 30(3): 239–264
https://doi.org/10.1071/FP02076
62 F Loreto, G Di Marco, D Tricoli, T D Sharkey. Measurements of mesophyll conductance, photosynthetic electron transport and alternative electron sinks of field grown wheat leaves. Photosynthesis Research, 1994, 41(3): 397–403
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02183042 pmid: 24310154
63 M M Chaves, M M Oliveira. Mechanisms underlying plant resilience to water deficits: prospects for water-saving agriculture. Journal of Experimental Botany, 2004, 55(407): 2365–2384
https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erh269 pmid: 15475377
64 G Cornic, J L Le Gouallec, J M Briantais, M Hodges. Effect of dehydration and high light on photosynthesis of two C3 plants (Phaseolus vulgaris L. and Elatostema repens (Lour.) Hall f.). Hall Plantation, 1989, 177(1): 84–90
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00392157 pmid: 24212275
65 R C Rosecrance, W H Krueger, L Milliron, J Bloese, C Garcia, B Mori. Moderate regulated deficit irrigation can increase olive oil yields and decrease tree growth in super high density ‘Arbequina’ olive orchards. Scientia Horticulturae, 2015, 190: 75–82
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2015.03.045
66 S U Cherbiy-Hoffmann, A J Hall, M C Rousseaux. Fruit, yield, and vegetative growth responses to photosynthetically active radiation during oil synthesis in olive trees. Scientia Horticulturae, 2013, 150: 110–116
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scienta.2012.10.027
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed